Thanks Debra- yes you have the gist of what I am inquiring about.
You see ever since I have had access to Tarot History, by way of books and the internet.......
"Where is Prudence?" "Why not Christ?" "Is that Faith or Mother Church?" "Is that a Shame painting?" and so on and so on.....
Someone came up with idea of these specific group of images/subjects.
Of course they were Christian, political,states of man etc.
But just like Monopoly there was this intent.....
When you play Monopoly at first and you were a child you did not automatically know that Mayfair was the most expensive property to have. Now you do... and if you go to London and you see the sign 'Mayfair' you know you are in Knob's Hill. That was the game's intention- someone would go for High rent- high returns and someone would go for Public ammenities. The property market. Thats the game.
I can see a sort of intent that is not the Ladder to Heaven but a game that indicates what it is.
How are you going to play your Hand? This hand you were dealt? It mimics life and that is why it can be used now as an esoteric tool.
So I can see an intent, even if some cards are missing like in the Visconti.
Just like Monopoly with Mayfair- they needed an expensive property and some cheap ones to make your folio have some chance or your hand in cards have some luck and some bad luck. So I am looking for the intent basically and I think it comes in pairs- played "two by Two" So I need an order- that if it was going to be memorised needed a rythm. One Two buckle my shoe- three four knock at the door.....
~Lorredan

Hi Lorredan,

Now I see exactly what you're getting at. I tried to approach the numbering and order problem from a fresh perspective a while ago, Here. I felt that pairs might be involved, but there were (of course) stumbling blocks and Trionfi information I hadn't seen to consider. It's a case of a little information being a dangerous thing as far as I personally am concerned, but the Monopoly analogy puts a whole new and thought-provoking slant on the question.

Pen

I just accidentally deleted a long post containing a transcript of Michael Dummett's translation of Lollio's Invettiva contra il Giuoco del Taroco.. Please weep for me. I'm going to bed now.

Pen wrote:I just accidentally deleted a long post containing a transcript of Michael Dummett's translation of Lollio's Invettiva contra il Giuoco del Taroco.. Please weep for me. I'm going to bed now.

... :-( ... I know that feeling.

Ok. Lorredan, Pen...why pairs?

Pen wrote:I just accidentally deleted a long post containing a transcript of Michael Dummett's translation of Lollio's Invettiva contra il Giuoco del Taroco.. Please weep for me. I'm going to bed now.

I know the feeling too Pen,

i've started using the Save function when writing longer posts, especially if I'm writing them on my ipad. It's a bit clunky because, as far as I can see, you need to then go to your control panel, choose drafts, and then "load" it again. But there have been several time when I've been pleased to have saved this way.

I'll look forward to reading it, if you've the energy to recompose it.

Have a nice cup of tea.

Thanks for the tea and sympathy, Huck and Robert. My son told me today that I could have recovered the post if I'd used Ctrl Z. Too late, unfortunately, but I know now. I'll have another go later perhaps (in Word...)

Debra wrote:

Ok. Lorredan, Pen...why pairs?

Simply because so many of the trumps seem to fall naturally into pairs: Fool/Magician; Emperor/Empress; Pope/Popess; Death/The Devil; Moon/Sun etc. - it was just one approach I tried to work on. Bearing in mind that the names can vary, and that the Ur tarot might even have started out with different names/titles from the ones we know of today, I thought it might be possible to pair everything beautifully. Suppose for example, that the Chariot began life in the creator's mind as 'War' - it might then be paired with 'Love'.

But of course Tarot could never be that straightforward - if it were someone would already have explained it to everyone's perfect satisfaction, and we know that the sequence was mysterious enough in the mid sixteenth century for Piscina and Anonymous to write their essays explaining it, and for Lollio to rant about '...this revolving bizarrerie... ' and say of the inventor that '...his fantasies had damaged and ruined his brain.' I love that bit.

Debra I see pairs in the likes of opposites. Strength/Fortitude next door to Hanged man who is weak-willed and wavering or irreselute. I have started a thread to explain my idea and I needed the sequence or hierachy to have remained much as it was and is now. A deck that had, say Temperance at card 6 threww the whole plan out.
I hope my musing on a Circus explains things.
Lorredan

Your musings on Circus makes me catch my breath for conveying the spirit of the cards.

A transcript of Dummett's translation of all of Lollio's Invective, more than the brief passage Vitali has in his essay, http://www.letarot.it/page.aspx?id=199&lng=eng? Wow. I hope you will post it sometime. I'd love to see it.

I totally agree with your concern about the order of trumps, Lorredan. In different orders, they are more suilable for different stories. And give particular cards different meanings. (Stories are important in game playing, too because they help one memorize the sequence being used.) Temperance, for example, might have a different meaning in position 6 than in position 14 (I am thinking something like the Eucharist at 14). I say, don't worry about what the "original" order was. Say what story or stories might have been used for a particular historical order you have in mind. Nobody knows what various orders were around at the time of Malatesta's Temple. And surely his Temple could have influenced tarot stories for quite a while after it was built, too. (I assume there was more than one. Even if there was an ur-story, people would have enjoyed making them up. That's what the Art of Memory was about.) Nobody knows when and where Temperance was 14. The earliest I can find is Alciato 1544, where it also was associated with Fama, i.e. Glory, as in the Eucharist--but that doesn't mean it didn't have that position earlier, in some places. (Some say it had that position in Aretino's Le Carte Parlanti; but I can't find it there and don't believe it.)

And I have a question: I don't get where you think the "hiccup" is. Is it at 14, or something else?